3 ms·

That makes sense. On the other hand, what made me side with the author here is this. About a year ago, I read a study (which I wish to hell I could locate ag

That makes sense. On the other hand, what made me side with the author here is this. About a year ago, I read a study (which I wish to hell I could locate again) that made the case that children raised with more phonetic languages, such as Spanish and Finnish, had a notable advantage over children whose native language is English, because they learned to read and write much earlier. While American, British, and Australian children puzzle over words like “plough,” “epitome,” and “Worcestershire,” children in Spain are steadily progressing through more and higher-level books, enabling them earlier access to advanced skills such as reasoning, synthesis, and discussion. They simply read at a higher level than English speakers of the same age. this highly resonates with my experience as Spanish is my first language and started learning English since first grade. Spanish speakers are expected to read arbitrary words and write (albeit with lots of spelling mistakes) by (optimistically) kindergarten or early first grade. The written-spoken language is very regular so it's very easy so "sound out" words. This is in contrast to what I hear is like to teach English speaking children. So yes, the author's hypothesis seems plausible to me.

silicon2401 6y ago
I'm not one to get offended easily, so that aspect of your post isn't an issue for me. However you don't seem to have a real foundation for your belief, just an assumption. I can believe that the average Japanese person doesn't know every single kanji, just like the average english-speaking person doesn't know every word in the dictionary, but I think it's a big stretch to assume that Japanese people can't even read books on the train because their literacy is so low.
- bernawil 6y ago
  I think it's a big stretch to assume that Japanese people can't even read books on the train because their literacy is so low. That's also an uncharitable interpretation of the article, or anything I pointed. The best way I could put it is, "the Japanese writing system is pretty cumbersome and in turn the people on average are less drawn to literal mediums and more drawn towards visual media". And that's just the opinion of an english teacher in japan after all.
matvore 6y ago
> The written-spoken language is very regular so it's very easy so "sound out" words. I don't know where I stand on your thesis (I was mostly arguing against the idea that Japanese people are demotivated to read more than English speakers because of kanji), but the main reservation I have about this is that it's pretty easy to fake knowledge of words this way. The pronunciation of something is secondary to its definition. But with a phonetic language, it's easy to fool yourself as well as others of an understanding that is not very deep. I remember once in middle school I elicited a laugh from my classmates when during group reading, I mispronounced "awry" (I had put the stress on the wrong syllable as well as pronounced the "y" as "ee"). However, I had a very good idea of what it meant at that time. OTOH, in that same class, it was a very unusual occurence for the teacher to interrupt group reading and confirm everyone knew what a word meant, so I believe many misunderstood words were glossed over routinely. I'm not saying being phonetic is a net loss, of course, just that "understanding" is a tricky thing to gauge, and may be harder as a side effect of some language being phonetic.
- bernawil 6y ago
  The pronunciation of something is secondary to its definition. But with a phonetic language, it's easy to fool yourself as well as others of an understanding that is not very deep. well, children are introduced to "reading" as in mapping written symbols to phonemes. Yes, there's more to reading than that, as in you can side-step the mapping to phonemes and map straight to "meaning", but nobody is doing that with children. Phonetic languages just make the (indispensable) step of text to sound easier and gives you a head start.

silicon2401 6y ago

I'm not one to get offended easily, so that aspect of your post isn't an issue for me. However you don't seem to have a real foundation for your belief, just an assumption. I can believe that the average Japanese person doesn't know every single kanji, just like the average english-speaking person doesn't know every word in the dictionary, but I think it's a big stretch to assume that Japanese people can't even read books on the train because their literacy is so low.

bernawil 6y ago
I think it's a big stretch to assume that Japanese people can't even read books on the train because their literacy is so low. That's also an uncharitable interpretation of the article, or anything I pointed. The best way I could put it is, "the Japanese writing system is pretty cumbersome and in turn the people on average are less drawn to literal mediums and more drawn towards visual media". And that's just the opinion of an english teacher in japan after all.

matvore 6y ago

> The written-spoken language is very regular so it's very easy so "sound out" words. I don't know where I stand on your thesis (I was mostly arguing against the idea that Japanese people are demotivated to read more than English speakers because of kanji), but the main reservation I have about this is that it's pretty easy to fake knowledge of words this way. The pronunciation of something is secondary to its definition. But with a phonetic language, it's easy to fool yourself as well as others of an understanding that is not very deep. I remember once in middle school I elicited a laugh from my classmates when during group reading, I mispronounced "awry" (I had put the stress on the wrong syllable as well as pronounced the "y" as "ee"). However, I had a very good idea of what it meant at that time. OTOH, in that same class, it was a very unusual occurence for the teacher to interrupt group reading and confirm everyone knew what a word meant, so I believe many misunderstood words were glossed over routinely. I'm not saying being phonetic is a net loss, of course, just that "understanding" is a tricky thing to gauge, and may be harder as a side effect of some language being phonetic.

bernawil 6y ago
The pronunciation of something is secondary to its definition. But with a phonetic language, it's easy to fool yourself as well as others of an understanding that is not very deep. well, children are introduced to "reading" as in mapping written symbols to phonemes. Yes, there's more to reading than that, as in you can side-step the mapping to phonemes and map straight to "meaning", but nobody is doing that with children. Phonetic languages just make the (indispensable) step of text to sound easier and gives you a head start.